opinions on these RAF nose cones anyone?

[mechanic]

Awesome day, helping a friend build some vegetable patches in his garden when he casually pulls out two RAF nose cones that he flew across the country to pick up the other day. He thinks they are from Canadian hurricanes though perhaps our experts may know more.





To me they look more like spits, a bit longer than the hurricanes I've seen. Saying that though, I wouldn't be surprised at all to be told that they both used the same cones.

Anyone got any ideas?

[Guppy35]

Not from either a Spit or Hurri.   Any markings on them that might help the detective work?

[mechanic]

I regret already not taking better close ups of the texts on the inside. I will have to go back and take some. All I can make out from zooming in is the right hand one says 'tighten nuts evenly to 30-40 ft/lbs' 

I'll post back when I have more details, cheers Dan.

What's your first instinct?

[Guppy35]

Looks like a Hamilton Standard patch on the inside of the rim.

No first instinct other than it wasn't Spitfire shaped.  As for Huricane, the Canadian built Hurri did use HS props, but the shape looks off

[Guppy35]

Ok my curiosity got me looking.  They look similar to this Hurricane spinner?  Still look a little off but who knows

[mechanic]

They look a lot like that I'd say. They have a small nut and bolt at the very tip, something I have not seen on any spit nose cone, or maybe I didn't look close enough.

I've asked him to send me some close ups, we'll see what happens. Appreciate your help and expertise mate, this has piqued my interest somewhat.

[Guppy35]

Check these two sites with Hurri restorations. Both show the spinners to be used

http://www.jneaircraft.com/am274/2008-2/

http://www.hawker-restorations-ltd.co.uk/_images/_completed/g-hury/hury8.html

[mechanic]

The spinner on the first link looks too squat and rounded at the tip. The second looks quite similar in shape to the ones i saw today but without the nipple nut on the tip.

Did they use the same spinner on mossies or any of the bombers? What about a Bolton? Now I have to know

[Guppy35]

They appear to be three blade spinners.  Check the spinner on the Defiant linked below

http://www.google.com/search?q=fairey+gannet&client=safari&hl=en&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=FqA1VaOKHLK1sATJ2oG4Cw&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAg&biw=1024&bih=672#hl=en&tbm=isch&q=boulton+paul+defiant+spinner&imgrc=ovQN2veFu5fiPM%253A%3BO_gERgKVNgsKIM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Faircraft-photographs.s3-website-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com%252Faircraft-ww2-boulton-paul-defiant-fighter.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.britmodeller.com%252Fforums%252Findex.php%253F%252Ftopic%252F234972051-forthcoming-airfix-new-tool-defiant%252Fpage-3%3B650%3B487

[mike8318]

You need to look for a part number and serial number. May be an assembly number on there too.

[Greebo]

The badge on the inside shot looks like a Hamilton Standard logo. British-built Hurricane Mk IIs used a Rotol propeller, not sure about Canadian ones though.

[bustr]

Are they for a Jablo-Rotol?

Here is a picture link with no caption from the internet. Looks like your spinners. What if this is a more modern, re-fit replacement for the sake of fly ability?

https://www.flickr.com/photos/53911058@N04/13033067364/

I suspect this is a modern replacement so the plane can be flown in the U.S. This one is based in Virginia Beach.

https://genebenson.com/history/military_aviation_museum.html



And then this bit: RCAF Hurricane XII and XIIa were fitted with Hamilton Standard props.

[Greebo]

That seems likely, Rotol prop blades were made of compressed wood and you'd probably have certification issues trying to use those nowadays. Also Packard Merlins had a different propeller spline to Rolls-Royce ones so if Canadian Hurris (or modern warbirds) used US engines they may have had US props too.

[Devil 505]

Also Packard Merlins had a different propeller spline to Rolls-Royce ones so if Canadian Hurris (or modern warbirds) used US engines they may have had US props too.

Perhaps this is the reason for dubbing the Packard engined spit9's as Mk. XVI's. 

[Karnak]

Perhaps this is the reason for dubbing the Packard engined spit9's as Mk. XVI's.

Yes, and the other tools needed to work on the engine.  Rolls-Royce used, IIRC, metric tools and Packard used imperial tools, or vice-a-versa.